Indeed, but would they really be predicting future top 5 and top 10 next year?

Golubev won a 500 in 2010. Look at him now. Flash in the pan, as it so often is. One tournament doesn't make a top player, a year of consistency does. And several years of consistency make the very best.

But no-one is saying he is already a top player, nor that he will definitely make the top 5. Most people are just saying the potential to be top ten eventually, and a reasonable chance of top 20 next year. I can't recall seeing anyone say he's likely to be top 10 (never mind top 5) next year. Predicting someone could potentially be a be top 10 fully accounts for the fact that it might not happen. There doesn't even need to be a good chance of it happening - just a vaguely plausible possibility.

It's a bit like everyone who was saying after the US Open that Andy could potentially be number one by the end of this year. He won't be, and the odds were long even then, but he still stood a chance, and a much better one than Nadal, or Ferrer, or anyone else except for Federer and Djokovic.

But no-one is saying he is already a top player, nor that he will definitely make the top 5. Most people are just saying the potential to be top ten eventually, and a reasonable chance of top 20 next year. I can't recall seeing anyone say he's likely to be top 10 (never mind top 5) next year. Predicting someone could potentially be a be top 10 fully accounts for the fact that it might not happen. There doesn't even need to be a good chance of it happening - just a vaguely plausible possibility.

It's a bit like everyone who was saying after the US Open that Andy could potentially be number one by the end of this year. He won't be, and the odds were long even then, but he still stood a chance, and a much better one than Nadal, or Ferrer, or anyone else except for Federer and Djokovic.

Let me explain. This new guy seems to have all the shots in his bag and unless he becomes crippled with nerves or injury he will wipe not only Murray off the court but many more in the current top 10. I've just been watching the match on You Tube and I am mightily impressed with JJ's performance JJ is not in the top eight this year but he might be next year. I sincerely hope I'm wrong

I think saying that this Janowicz is going wipe Murray off the court is a bit over the top.

People were going mad over Goffin after the French Open and he's hardly set the world alight since. Or Tomic that was apparently destined to be a top player and now can't seem to go a match without getting bagelled.

Wait and see whether this guy actually does anything after this week before professing that he's going to wipe the floor with anyone.

Ferrer was pushed all the way today in the first set - saving all 10 break points and then taking 1/2 break points himself to win it 7-5. It's a shame that Llodra got injured in the second set as he was playing so brilliantly up to then - full credit to him for keeping on trying his hardest though.

What people haven't twigged is that Ferrer is an amazing player AND on a hot streak himself, having won Valencia last week. Next week will actually be restful for him, with a day off between each Round Robin.

Great match. As you say pity the Llodra had an injury but he still kept fighting. More enjoyable than the one before. Go Ferrer. It is your time to win a Masters. As I said earlier Janowicz looks overtired and he even said so in his interview. perhaps that is not a good thing to say before facing a top player as they would probably jump on it.

Err why? The guys that are out just weren;t good enough. You can jump up and down all you like but that's a fact. The best players are left and I hope Ferrer goes on to win it.

If you mean the players who played the best this week then it's not saying anything really; if you're saying that the players who got to the SF are all somehow 'better' than the top seeds who went out early then it's nonsense to base such an assessment on one tournament played the week before the top players have a date with something rather more important in their eyes. So either way tj was quite right in what she said.

I have to quote nothing, as you didn't actually say anything yourself.

I did consider editing my post to include the caveat of not talking about trolls or drama queens, but I thought that was already obvious, and pointing it out would be rude. So please rest assured that the person you have quoted was not on my horizon when talking about how the vast majority of people and pundits are thinking, and I still see no reason to include them, as they are clearly being melodramatic and sensationalist.

Yes, there are good reasons for being for Ferrer. He has been on the tour for so many years, steadily improving until now at his best. He deserves the title in the same way as Andy deserved a GS title. And furthermore he can put things into proportion: that a newcomer cannot simply come and wipe the floor with everybody, as emotional as such a story is. I think it was in on of the ATP questionnaires where they asked players for the best returner in the cicuit. A lot of them named Ferrer. This afternoon he must prove it although the difference in height will be massive and look like a huge disadvantage. We will see. speaking of disadvantage: I was so annoyed when I saw JJ vs. Simon at least having three to four free points every service game. No doubt, he gave a very solid display of his skills and mental strenght. nevertheless, I do not want to see the future in him. and as I and a lot of other posters have stated: once the players have perceived him and his style properly, which they have not done in this tournament for different reasons, he will not have a walk in the park any longer. Many young players had to experience highs and lows after being praised as the next big thing. yet, somehow the generation Andy-Rafa-Nole must be challenged by the "little ones", mustn't they.